Skip to main content

Full text of "State Dept cable 1977-52651"

See other formats


Margaret P. Grafeld Declassified/Released US Department of State EO Systematic Review 22 May 2009 

Message Text 

SECRET 

PAGE 01 MBFRV 00111 111126Z 
ACTION SS-25 

INFO OCT-01 ISO-OO SSO-OO /026 W 

11115 1Z 123263/20 

P 111002Z MAR 77 

FM USDEL MBFR VIENNA 

TO SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 2029 

SECRET MBFR VIENNA 0111 

EXDIS 

DEPARTMENT PLEASE PASS DEFENSE 

FROM US REP MBFR 

E.O. 11652: GDS 
TAGS: PARM, NATO 

SUBJECT: MBFR: BILATERAL DISCUSSION WITH SOVIET REPS OF MARCH 
10, 1977 

REF: MBFR VIENNA 0110 

THE MATERIAL BELOW IS A RECORD OF OTHER POINTS MADE IN THE 
MARCH 10 BILATERAL DISCUSSION BETWEEN US REPS AND SOVIET REPS 
TARASOV AND SHUSTOV (SEE REFTEL). THIS INFORMATION IS BEING 
GIVEN TO FRG AND UK DELEGATIONS ONLY, OT TO OTHER ALLIED 
DELEGATIONS. ADDRESSEES ARE REQUESTED TO HOLD THIS INFORMATION 
UNDER TIGHT CONTROL. 

1 . US REP SAID, TO TURN TO ANOTHER SUBJECT, THAT OF THE 
EASTERN FEBRUARY 19, 1976 PROPOSAL: WAS HIS ASSUMPTION CORRECT 
THAT, UNDER THE EASTERN PROPOSAL OF FEBRUARY 19, 1976, STAGE 
ONE ARMAMENT REDUCTIONS BY US AND SOVIET FORCES WOULD COVER 
ONLY THE FIVE ARMAMENTS SPECIFIED IN THAT PROPOSAL? TARASOV 
SAID THATTHIS WAS CORRECT. THE EAST HAD BELIEVED IN ACROSS- 
THE-BOARD REDUCTIONS OF ALL ARMAMENTS AND STILL DID SO. HOWEVER, 

SECRET 

SECRET 

PAGE 02 MBFRV 001 11 111126Z 

AS A COMPROMISE, IN FORMULATING ITS FEBRUARY 1976 PROPOSAL, 

IT HAD MOVED TO THE SPECIFICATION FOR REDUCTION OF THOSE TYPES 
OF ARMAMENTS SPECIFICALLY LISTED IN THE PROPOSAL. NATURALLY, 

IT WAS EXPECTED THAT THERE WOULD BE LIMITATIONS ON THE 
RESIDUAL LEVELS OF THESE ARMAMENTS TO BE REDUCED BY BOTH THE 
US AND SOVIET UNION. US REP SAID THIS HAD BEEN CLEAR AND WAS 
ONE OBVIOUS DISADVANTAGE OF THE PROPOSAL. 


Margaret P. Grafeld Declassified/Released US Department of State EO Systematic Review 22 May 2009 



Margaret P. Grafeld Declassified/Released US Department of State EO Systematic Review 22 May 2009 


2. US REP ASKED WHAT IMPACT THIS LIMITATION OF ARMAMENT 
REDUCTIONS TO THE FIVE TYPES SPECIFIED IN THE FEBRUARY 1976 
PROPOSAL WOULD HAVE ON THE GENERAL COMMITMENT WHICH THE EAST 
WISHED NON-US WESTERN DIRECT PARTICIPANTS TO UNDERTAKE IN A 
FIRST STAGE AGREEMENT REGARDING THEIR STAGE TWO REDUCTIONS? 

WOULD THE EAST DOP ITS DEMANDS 

ON THESE PARTICIPANTS AS REGARDS REDUCTION OF ARMAMENTS? 

SHUSTOV EXPLAINED THAT UNDER THE FEBRUARY 19 PROPOSAL, THE EAST 
ASKED FOR A GENERAL COMMITMENT FROM NON-US WESTERN DIRECT 
PARTICIPANTS ON THE SCOPE AND TIMING OF THEIR REDUCTIONS. UNDER 
THE EASTERN UNDERSTANDING OF THE AGREEMENTS REACHED IN THE 
PREPARATORY TALKS, EACH PARTICIPANT HAD COMMITTED ITSELF TO 
REDUCE ITS ARMED FORCES AND THEIR ARMAMENTS. HENCE, THE WORD 
QUOTE SCOPE UNQUOTE IN THE EASTERN FEBRUARY 19 PROPOSAL 
REFERRED TO A COMMITMENT BY NON-US WESTERN DIRECT PARTICIPANTS 
TO REDUCE A SPECIFIC PERCENTAGE OF THEIR MILITARY MANPOWER AND 
ARMAMENTS IN A SECOND PHASE. THIS WAS DISTINGUISHED FROM THE 
SPECIFIC COMMITMENTS EXPECTED FROM THE US AND SOVIET UNION IN A 
FIRST AGREEMENT BY THE FACT THAT THE US AND SOVIETS WOULD BE 
EXPECTED TO LIST THE SPECIFIC TYPES OF ARMAMENTS THAT THEY 
WOULD REDUCE AND THE NUMBERS INVOLVED. UNDER THE GENERAL 
COMMITMENT, THE NON-US WESTERN DIRECT PARTICIPANTS WOULD NOT 
HAVE TO SPECIFY THE PARTICULAR TYPE OF ARMAMENTS INVOLVED NOR 
THEIR NUMBERS. 

3. TARASOV SAID EASTERN PARTICIPANTS WERE WELL AWARE OF 
WESTERN CRITICISMS THAT THE GENERAL COMMITMENT THE EAST WAS 
ASKING FOR WAS TOO BROAD. IF WESTERN PARTICIPANTS WISHED TO 

SECRET 

SECRET 

PAGE 03 MBFR V 00111 111126Z 

PROPOSE THAT THE NON-US WESTERN DIRECT PARTICIPANTS UNDERTAKE 
A STAGE ONE COMMITMENT OBLIGATING THEM TO REDUCE ONLY THEIR 
MILITARY MANPOWER IN STAGE TWO, EASTERN PARTICIPANTS WOULD BE 
PREPARED TO GIVE THEIR VIEWS ON SUCH A PROPOSAL. HOWEVER, 

THERE WAS AN ASSOCIATED PROBLEM: AS US REPS WERE WELL AWARE, 

EASTERN REPS HAD SEVERAL TIMES CRITICIZED THE FACT THAT UNDER THE 
WESTERN DECEMBER 1975 PROPOSAL, THE US WOULD WITHDRAW NUCLEAR 
ARMAMENTS BUT THEY COULD BE REPLACED THROUGH INCREASES IN THE 
STOCKS OF MOST OF THE SAME ARMAMENTS BY THE ALLIES OF THE US, 

SUCH AS THE FRG. THIS PROBLEM WOULD HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED IN 
THE CONTEXT OF DISCUSSION OF THE CONTENT OF THE GENERAL 
COMMITMENT BY THE NON-US WESTERN DIRECT PARTICIPANTS. 

THAT IS, EASTERN VIEWS ON A PROPOSAL TO LIMIT THE GENERAL 
COMMITMENT TO AN OBLIGATION TO REDUCE MANPOWER IN THE SECOND 
STAGE WOULD DEPEND ON SEVERAL FACTORS SUCH AS WHETHER THERE WOULD 
BE A LIMIT ON ARMAMENTS HELD BY THE WEST EUROPEAN AND CANADIAN 
FORCES OF THE TYPES TO BE LIMITED IN THE FORCES OF THE US AND SOVIETS. 

COMMENT: TARASOV'S REMARKS WERE DIRECT. WE REGARD THEM AS 


Margaret P. Grafeld Declassified/Released US Department of State EO Systematic Review 22 May 2009 



Margaret P. Grafeld Declassified/Released US Department of State EO Systematic Review 22 May 2009 

AN ACCURATE REFLECTION OF SOVIET THINKING AT THIS POINT ON 
THE SUBJECTS TREATED. RESOR 

SECRET 

NNN 


Margaret P. Grafeld Declassified/Released US Department of State EO Systematic Review 22 May 2009 



Margaret P. Grafeld Declassified/Released US Department of State EO Systematic Review 22 May 2009 


Message Attributes 


Automatic Decaptioning: Z 
Capture Date: 01 -Jan-1 994 12:00:00 am 
Channel Indicators: n/a 
Current Classification: UNCLASSIFIED 

Concepts: MUTUAL FORCE REDUCTIONS, NEGOTIATIONS, MEETING REPORTS 

Control Number: n/a 
Copy: SINGLE 

Sent Date: 11 -Mar-1 977 12:00:00 am 

Decaption Date: 22 May 2009 
Decaption Note: 25 YEAR REVIEW 
Disposition Action: RELEASED 
Disposition Approved on Date: 

Disposition Case Number: n/a 
Disposition Comment: 25 YEAR REVIEW 
Disposition Date: 22 May 2009 
Disposition Event: 

Disposition History: n/a 
Disposition Reason: 

Disposition Remarks: 

Document Number: 1 977MBFRV001 1 1 

Document Source: CORE 

Document Unique ID: 00 

Drafter: n/a 

Enclosure: n/a 

Executive Order: GS 

Errors: N/A 

Expiration: 

Film Number: D770084-0575 

Format: TEL 

From: MBFR VIENNA 

Handling Restrictions: 

Image Path: 

ISecure: 1 

Legacy Key: Iink1977/newtext/t19770369/aaaacivz.tel 

Line Count: 118 
Litigation Code IDs: 

Litigation Codes: 

Litigation History: 

Locator: TEXT ON-LINE, ON MICROFILM 

Message ID: 1bcbbab9-c288-dd11-92da-001cc4696bcc 

Office: ACTION SS 

Original Classification: SECRET 

Original Handling Restrictions: EXDIS 

Original Previous Classification: n/a 

Original Previous Handling Restrictions: n/a 

Page Count: 3 

Previous Channel Indicators: n/a 
Previous Classification: SECRET 
Previous Handling Restrictions: EXDIS 
Reference: 77 MBFR VIENNA 1 1 0 
Retention: 0 

Review Action: RELEASED, APPROVED 
Review Content Flags: 

Review Date: 22-Nov-2004 12:00:00 am 
Review Event: 

Review Exemptions: n/a 
Review Media Identifier: 

Review Release Date: n/a 
Review Release Event: n/a 
Review Transfer Date: 

Review Withdrawn Fields: n/a 
SAS ID: 3136789 
Secure: OPEN 
Status: NATIVE 

Subject: MBFR: BILATERAL DISCUSSION WITH SOVIET REPS OF MARCH 10, 1977 
TAGS: PARM, US, UR, NATO 
To: STATE 
Type: TE 

vdkvgwkey: odbc://SAS/SAS.dbo.SAS_Docs/1bcbbab9-c288-dd1 1-92da-001cc4696bcc 
Review Markings: 

Margaret P. Grafeld 
Declassified/Released 
US Department of State 
EO Systematic Review 
22 May 2009 

Markings: Margaret P. Grafeld Declassified/Released US Department of State EO Systematic Review 22 May 2009 


Margaret P. Grafeld Declassified/Released US Department of State EO Systematic Review 22 May 2009